From: Torsten
Message: 67156
Date: 2011-02-07
> > *****GK: How would this differ from what I said earlier, viz.,I think I'll have to revise that. The PIE root is *g^hlend(h)- "glänzen, schauen, blicken" according to Pokorny, of which the *g^hl- becomes Proto-Gmc *gl-, as seen in the corresponding entry in
> > that the doublets remained as part of the developing "local"
> > Germanic language because the Grimm-shifted incoming Germani mixed
> > with the NWB-ers and in the linguistic interplay many of the old
> > place names survived as part of the common stock, while the
> > NWB'ers adopted the Grimm-shifted speech of the colonists. On this
> > perspective the actual Grimm shift could have occurred in the
> > colonizing area a long time before their invasion of the NWB
> > territory.*****
>
> Yes. More accurately they remained as forms with differing
> sociolects, one of incoming Germani in related But that is correct;
> furthermore an interpretation that PIE *danu- > Tanew outright
> demands it, xarigasti-, assuming the formal hat from Negau is really
> Ariovistus', pushes it back before mid 1st century BCE, and my own
> tentative *gl-and-Ãk- -> Clondicus even pushes it further back to
> before the split between Proto-Germanic (Sciri?) and Bastarnian, ie
> before 200 BCE. On the other hand, no Grimm in Przeginia
> http://tech.groups.yahoo.com/group/cybalist/message/59398
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Przeginia
> I'm not convinced it's a loan
> http://tech.groups.yahoo.com/group/cybalist/message/20843
>
> So the incoming Germani from Przeworsk would have spoken post-Grimm
> Germanic and the resident NWBers/laeti
> http://tech.groups.yahoo.com/group/cybalist/message/64932
> the thread starting in
> http://tech.groups.yahoo.com/group/cybalist/message/65502
> cf also Etruscan lautn, gen. lautun "family"(?)
> would have spoken a similar, unshifted language, much like today (or
> yesterday) in that area the locals speak Platt and the incoming
> people who matter speak Hochdeutsch.